Assessing Writing

7 articles
Year: Topic: Clear
Export:
gender and writing ×

April 2026

  1. Exploring the roles of gender, linguistic, and cognitive variables in continuation writing task performance among learners of English
    doi:10.1016/j.asw.2026.101043

October 2025

  1. Which gender provides more specific peer feedback? Gender and assessment training’s effects on peer feedback specificity and intrapersonal factors
    Abstract

    This study investigated the effects of assessor gender (male vs. female), fictitious assessee gender (male vs. female), and assessment training (with vs. without) on peer feedback specificity (i.e. localisation and focus) and intrapersonal factors (i.e. trust in the self as an assessor and discomfort). This study involved 240 undergraduate psychology students (nMen=120, nWomen=120), with half receiving assessment training and the other half receiving the task instructions. Participants were divided into eight subgroups based on training condition and their self-reported gender to provide peer feedback to three writing samples (poor, average, excellent quality) by fictitious male or female peer assessees in Eduflow. A total of 3017 peer feedback segments were analysed, revealing that trained or untrained male and female assessors were comparable in most peer feedback specificity categories when assessing fictitious male or female assessees. Nonetheless, we also found that female assessors excelled in certain categories of peer feedback specificity, while male assessors also demonstrated competencies in other categories. Results also showed that assessors who received assessment training provided localised peer feedback in all the writing samples. Finally, gender and training did not affect participants’ trust in their abilities and (dis)comfort when providing peer feedback.

    doi:10.1016/j.asw.2025.100987

January 2025

  1. Connecting L2 reading emotions and writing performance through imaginative capacity in the story continuation writing task: A gender difference perspective
    doi:10.1016/j.asw.2025.100914

April 2024

  1. Writing productivity development in elementary school: A systematic review
    Abstract

    The ability to produce fluent and coherent written text impacts learning and attainments. Valid and reliable assessments of writing are needed to monitor progression, develop goals for writing and identify struggling writers. In order to inform practice and research a systematic review was conducted to investigate which writing productivity measures captured writing development and identified struggling writers in elementary school. Sixty-seven empirical studies were identified for inclusion, appraised, and their data extracted under the themes of writing genre, duration of writing task, use of priming of topic knowledge prior to the writing assessment, use of planning time, writing modality, gender, age of participants and learning difficulties. Total Number of Words and Correct Word Sequences were the most common means of measuring productivity. Productivity varied significantly between genres and durations of writing tasks and was higher in girls than boys. Students with learning difficulties scored significantly lower in writing productivity when compared to typically developing peers. Insufficient research was available to draw conclusions regarding the effects of priming of topic knowledge, planning and modality on writing productivity. Study limitations, links to the assessment of writing and recommended further research are discussed.

    doi:10.1016/j.asw.2024.100834
  2. The associations among growth mindsets, the ideal L2 writing self, and L2 writing enjoyment and their impacts on L2 English writing performance: A gender difference perspective
    doi:10.1016/j.asw.2024.100832
  3. Assessing writing and spelling interest and self-beliefs: Does the type of pictorial support affect first and third graders’ responses?
    Abstract

    An array of pictorial supports (e.g., emojis, geometrical figures, animals) is often used in studies assessing young students’ writing motivation with Likert scales. However, although these images may influence the students’ responses, sufficient rationales for these choices are often absent from the studies. To the best of our knowledge, the present study is the first to investigate two different types of pictorial support (circles vs. faces) in Likert scales assessing first and third graders’ writing interest, self-concept, and spelling interest and self-efficacy. The samples consist of 2197 first graders (mean age 6.8 years) and 1740 third graders (mean age 8.4 years). Results show statistically significant differences among the scales indicating that when face-scales are used, first-graders skip motivation items more often, and students in both grades avoid the minimum values of the scale more often. Gender differences are also found indicating that when face-scales are used, boys in third grade avoid maximum values more often, and girls in both grades avoid the minimum values more often. These findings suggest that the use of circle-scales compared to face-scales seem more appropriate in scales measuring young students’ writing and spelling interest and self-beliefs.

    doi:10.1016/j.asw.2024.100833

January 1996

  1. Gender bias and critique of student writing
    doi:10.1016/s1075-2935(96)90004-5